STEVEN FRIEDMAN: Altering party funding stands better chance of cutting corruption than trying Zuma
Last week, the courts were given a great opportunity to weaken corruption — but the case in question is not the one that has been hogging headlines. The decision to prosecute Jacob Zuma attracts great interest but is unlikely to help the fight against corruption much. It is likely to drag on and on, and probably won’t deter anyone from using public office for private gain even if Zuma is found guilty. In divided societies, politicians who are convicted of corruption are villains to their opponents, but heroes to their supporters. Being found guilty often increases hero worship because it shows that the "enemy" (in this case "white monopoly capital" and "clever blacks") is persecuting the hero. This does not mean Zuma should not be prosecuted, but the case is more likely to entertain than to make a difference.The case that will make the difference was heard in the Constitutional Court: it was asked to confirm a lower-court ruling that political parties must tell us who gives them mon...
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.
Subscribe now to unlock this article.
Support BusinessLIVE’s award-winning journalism for R129 per month (digital access only).
There’s never been a more important time to support independent journalism in SA. Our subscription packages now offer an ad-free experience for readers.
Cancel anytime.
Questions? Email helpdesk@businesslive.co.za or call 0860 52 52 00. Got a subscription voucher? Redeem it now.